Do you have any experience w the Sony RX-10 iii?
Jun 26, 2016 09:38:47 #
Shutterbugsailer wrote:
The only fly in the ointment is its build quality. Otherwise it would serve 90% of hobbyist photographers, as well as being suitable for light professional use
Not sure what you find wrong with the build quality as the body is magnesium and weather sealed.
Jun 26, 2016 09:47:10 #
If I understand you correctly, you would prefer it be made of metal? That would indeed make it heavier and not the easy to travel with camera that I love. I was not concerned about the build, again if this is what you mean. The camera is so off the wall great that you will love using it. Let me know what you decide. Good luck.
Jun 26, 2016 09:58:31 #
Somerset Lynn wrote:
If I understand you correctly, you would prefer it be made of metal? That would indeed make it heavier and not the easy to travel with camera that I love. I was not concerned about the build, again if this is what you mean. The camera is so off the wall great that you will love using it. Let me know what you decide. Good luck.
Lynn, if you were responding to me, I was stating that the body is made of magnesium and is weather sealed. You can check,this by reading the description on B&H photos web site.
Jun 26, 2016 10:20:29 #
No. Replying to the person who complained about the build. I love the camera and wouldn't want it to be heavier. Materials used make it light. I think Rockwells only complaint is the materials used.
Jun 26, 2016 10:39:12 #
Somerset Lynn wrote:
No. Replying to the person who complained about the build. I love the camera and wouldn't want it to be heavier. Materials used make it light. I think Rockwells only complaint is the materials used.
Lynn, it would avoid confusion in the future if you clicked on "Quote Reply" just makes things easier when responding to someone's post. That way we all know who you are responding to.
Jun 26, 2016 11:13:10 #
Carl D wrote:
Lynn, it would avoid confusion in the future if you clicked on "Quote Reply" just makes things easier when responding to someone's post. That way we all know who you are responding to.
Got it. Didn't know about that.
Thanks
Jun 26, 2016 22:01:35 #
Somerset Lynn wrote:
If I understand you correctly, you would prefer it be made of metal? That would indeed make it heavier and not the easy to travel with camera that I love. I was not concerned about the build, again if this is what you mean. The camera is so off the wall great that you will love using it. Let me know what you decide. Good luck.
Based on the Ken Rockwell review, it would have been nice if the gears that extend and retract the lens were made of metal, instead of plastic.
Jun 26, 2016 22:04:29 #
Yes. It would have been but not a deal breaker for me.
Shutterbugsailer wrote:
Based on the Ken Rockwell review, it would have been nice if the gears that extend and retract the lens were made of metal, instead of plastic.
Jun 27, 2016 06:41:54 #
Metal gears would have made more noise and in this case a plastic like Noryl or Delrin are more than adequate. As. A retired toolmaker/machinest I have made hundreds of Delrin gears.
Jun 27, 2016 07:03:47 #
[quote=Carl D]Metal gears would have made more noise and in this case a plastic like Noryl or Delrin are more than adequate. As. A retired toolmaker/machinest I have made hundreds of Delrin gears.[/quote
Thanks for your comment. It should help those who think the camera isn't built well.
Thanks for your comment. It should help those who think the camera isn't built well.
Jun 29, 2016 11:01:57 #
mas24 wrote:
The Sony RX-10III is expensive, $1500, but so are a lot of cameras. Leica and Hasselblad cameras are two examples. The Sony RX-10III has sold out at B&H. You have to wait now to get it, which indicates that many like this camera. And there will be few, if none, returning this camera back to B&H because it cost too much.
There are, today, three used RX10 iii on B&H...one probably mine. Condition 9 on two, 10 on the third (I suspect that was mine). Substantial savings on these used cameras.
Jun 29, 2016 11:11:53 #
I would have purchased one if I didnt have one. You werent happy with it?
tinplater wrote:
There are, today, three used RX10 iii on B&H...one probably mine. Condition 9 on two, 10 on the third (I suspect that was mine). Substantial savings on these used cameras.
Jun 30, 2016 10:34:03 #
Somerset Lynn wrote:
I would have purchased one if I didnt have one. You werent happy with it?
I was somewhat pleased with the camera, however the lens on the RX10 original version is constant 2.8 and I felt it is just a bit sharper with better contrast. So I was a bit disappointed in M3 image quality. Since I would rarely use the extra 200-600 reach, I elected to return it and rebuy a used RX10 (which I had sold to finance the M3) for $400 on Ebay. In my opinion you can't spend $400 more effectively than that! I love the original. It is the best compromise of image quality, build quality, weight and size, and of course price, making it an ideal, affordable travel camera.
Jun 30, 2016 11:36:52 #
tinplater wrote:
I was somewhat pleased with the camera, however th... (show quote)
I had the Leica vlux 4, constant f2, and 400-600mm. This one is so far superior. Love the range. That's why I bought it.
Enjoy your m2.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.